Breakin' the law

I got stopped the other day and ticketed for not wearing my seat belt. I usually wear my seat belt, 1. when the kids are in the car, 2. when I'm on the highway, or 3. in inclement weather. Alison and I had just left the car dealership from returning our leased Volvo. The cop was sitting behind a blind corner on the highway entrance ramp following a traffic light. We were stopped at the light as the first car around the corner, and I hadn't been doing more than 5 mph at the time. Consequently, because the seat belt engages when you hit the brake, I was unable to grab it before approaching the officer.

I am vehemently opposed to mandatory seat belt laws for adults, and am quite bitter that I received a ticket.

First, let me say that seatbelts are a good idea and should be worn. I have no argument against wearing it. Seat belt LAWS - not so much. There are good arguments as to why the government shouldn't force individuals driving to wear them and why we don't want police actively enforcing seatbelt laws. The decision over whether or not to wear a seatbelt is inherently an individual one, as the consequences of not wearing one are likewise individual. Seat belt laws are solely focused on state/local revenue generation. That officer was solely looking to make his ticket quota, and was doing nothing to protect the town of Greenberg for which he serves.

Where in the constitution does it give the government the obligation to protect an individual from him or herself? Medicine is a good idea too. However, it would unconstitutional to create a law to force people to take medication. Any medical professional who would attempt to force a person without full consent to use a device, take a drug, or have surgery to protect a person’s health, would be subject to full prosecution of the law. The courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have confirmed a person has the right to determine his/her own individual personal health care standards. Politicians, therefore, are claiming, through mandatory seatbelt laws, more power over our bodies than legally allowed not only by the Constitution, but by federal and state laws.

The following is New York state's description of why you are required to wear a seat belt:
"A seat belt absorbs the force of impact in a traffic crash and reduces your risk of being killed or injured. It holds you securely to help prevent you from striking hard objects inside the vehicle while being tossed around. You are less likely to be thrown (ejected) through the vehicle's windshield or doors - and vehicle ejection usually results in death.Your seat belt offers the most protection when you sit upright. Most seat belts easily adjust to allow some comfort and free movement until you need it for protection."

I don't disagree with any of that. I don't love cell phone usage laws, but at least those protect others (in therory). Who is this protecting besides the violator?

As an aside, in creating their laws, states can mandate whether the police should be allowed to stop a vehicle solely because the officer suspects that someone in the car hasn't buckled up (primary seat belt laws vs. secondary laws). About half the states permit only secondary enforcement of seat belt laws (including every New England State except CT which can and NH whcih has no seat belt law - http://www.iihs.org/laws/safetybeltuse.aspx), permitting seat belt enforcement when the police make a traffic stop for some other traffic violation while prohibiting traffic stops just to write a seat belt ticket. It prohibits an officer from sitting on an on-ramp all day checking seat belts. Unfortunately not New York.

I am far from a Libertarian, that is for sure, but they have this one right.